11 November 2022

Major tech platforms should be democratically accountable public utilities

For years I muttered about recognizing the big tech stacks — Google, Facebook, Amazon, Twitter — as utilities for a Socialist Data Not Quite Utopia, and in 2019 I started a long-running Twitter thread about it, pointing to examples which demonstrate the need.

At the head of the thread I initially talked about “nationalizing” these resources, but I changed gears to a more fundamental framing of making them democratically accountable public utilities, implying that forms of governance other than turning to Westphalian nation-states would be suitiable (and indeed preferrable to many examples of government we have now). With that substitution, the pitch goes like this:

A proposal

I am not a policy wonk so this is a provocation; I imagine that it likely is wrongheaded in important ways. I offer it not as the thing I think is right, but rather as a set of ideas to respond to, exemplifying my principles.

I hesitate to strangle tech industry innovation, so I do not necessarily want to make all tech publicly controlled. For big tech stacks which present a problem, I would make a policy of issuing them a warning:

“You have not been acting with sufficient care for the public interest. In 18 months you will undergo a forced buyout at your current valuation … unless you do better. Here are our concerns …”

If they get this wake-up call and find ways to justify their existence as private entities, great! Leave them alone. Threat of being converted into public utilities might work on some existing companies. But the more I think about the option, the more cases I see where converting private platforms into public utilities is obviously better.

Why this is good

Converting platforms like Amazon & Google into utilities enables us to kill the worst of the ad-supported model with all it implies. We could simply substitute the public treasury for the equivalent ad revenue without changing a thing. And having done that, it opens the door to more thoughtful choices.

Publicly-subsidized compute services promote free speech and entrepreneurship, just like roads and the Post Office do. (Indeed, I submit that Article I Section 8 of the US Constitution gives the US Federal government a mandate to do this.) Publicly-provided compute resources could easily be more fair, open, and equitable than their private equivalents.

Publicly-owned search tools should be actively managed as public policy. Tune the algorithms to hide lies, scams, incitements to violence, et cetera. Yes, that politicizes the choices in those algorithms. But they always were political. You do not trust the government with the power to make those choices? All the more demonstration of the need for effective, democratically-accountable public institutions: we have to solve that problem anyway.

Amazon as an example

Turning Amazon into a public utility could mean:

  • A perfect universal public library, with …
    • Kindle books free for all
    • Authors compensated fairly (by whatever standards we choose democratically) rather than by how they perform in the Amazon marketplace
    • Excluding from the free library material which is fraudulent or otherwise not subject to free speech protections
  • Publicly-accountable product reviewing processes, to ensure that crap products cannot scam people
  • A unified library of public-domain legacy media, so old movies and stuff do not vanish
  • A truly level playing field for product marketing & distribution, undercutting the grip of advertising and big players’ other advantages over smaller ones
  • Making Amazon Web Services resources free to entrepreneurs, to foster experimentation and projects worth doing which have no revenue model to dazzle investors. If something starts to put significant load on the public network — media traffic or computing services — regulators can then inspect what it is doing:
    • If it is lying, scamming, or committing other crimes with public resources, it gets cut off
    • If people benefit from it as a public service, it stays a free utility
    • If it is business, using public resources to profit honestly, it starts to pay for the use of those resources

Why we cannot go on as we have

If we do not turn the tech stacks into public utilities like this, Metcalfe’s Law and other winner-take-all dynamics will give us neo-feudalism instead: all of us dependent on a narrow oligarchy who own and control the resources which we depend upon.

So instead of resenting the big tech companies trying to create monopolies, I like to think of them as building utilities for us to seize in order to move us toward fully automated luxury gay space communism.

Food for thought

Big ideas

My favorite commentaries and projects

Observations from Cory Doctrow

Doctorow has a vision different from but parallel to my Socialist Data Not Quite Utopia

Google

Amazon

Facebook

Miscellany

A bunch of news items & comments which whet my appetite for turning tech stacks into democratically accountable public utilities

No comments: